Humanity+ and the Transhumanist Declaration

The Transhumanist Declaration was originally drafted in 1998 by an international group of philosophers and scientists⁠—including Nick Bostrom and David Pearce⁠—under the auspices of the World Transhumanist Association (WTA). It was revised to its current eight-point form in 2009, when the WTA rebranded as Humanity+. The Declaration lays the foundation for a vision of Transhumanism that is widely accepted by transhumanists today, enumerating both goals to strive for and practices to achieve them.

The Mormon Transhumanist Association’s relationship to this document runs deep. The MTA was founded on 3 March 2006 and formally affiliated with the World Transhumanist Association on 6 July 2006, making the Declaration a founding commitment of the Association from the very beginning. The MTA affirms the Declaration not out of institutional deference, but because its aspirations converge with Mormon teachings about eternal progression, theosis, and compassionate creation. You don’t have to hold a secular worldview to embrace the Declaration. Its aspirations are practical ones⁠—wellbeing, the extension of human capability, attention to risk, inclusive deliberation⁠—and Mormon theology arrives at the very same aspirations along its own path.

The Transhumanist Declaration

We elaborate on each point of the Declaration below. As with our approach to the Affirmation, this elaboration is illustrative rather than prescriptive: it represents one way Mormon Transhumanists understand the Declaration, not the only way.

Point 1

Humanity stands to be profoundly affected by science and technology in the future. We envision the possibility of broadening human potential by overcoming aging, cognitive shortcomings, involuntary suffering, and our confinement to planet Earth.

The first point commits us to using science and technology to expand human potential and curtail the effects of old age and other forms of human suffering. For Mormon Transhumanists, this vision resonates with prophetic anticipations of transfiguration, immortality, and resurrection. Overcoming aging, involuntary suffering, and even our confinement to one world are not foreign ambitions grafted onto Mormonism; they echo the scriptural promise that “the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Corinthians 15:26).

Point 2

We believe that humanity’s potential is still mostly unrealized. There are possible scenarios that lead to wonderful and exceedingly worthwhile enhanced human conditions.

The second point expresses a belief that humanity’s potential is still largely unrealized. Mormonism teaches the same in theological terms: we are children of God, with a divine inheritance scarcely begun. The doctrine of eternal progression frames human potential as effectively inexhaustible⁠—an open frontier rather than a fixed allotment.

Point 3

We recognize that humanity faces serious risks, especially from the misuse of new technologies. There are possible realistic scenarios that lead to the loss of most, or even all, of what we hold valuable. Some of these scenarios are drastic, others are subtle. Although all progress is change, not all change is progress.

The third point is a conscious acknowledgment that not all change is progress, and that technological power can be misapplied or even abused. Mormon Transhumanism isn’t naive optimism about technology. The Affirmation likewise binds us to “identify and prepare for risks and responsibilities associated with future advances.” Wisdom requires holding hope and caution together.

Point 4

Research effort needs to be invested into understanding these prospects. We need to carefully deliberate how best to reduce risks and expedite beneficial applications. We also need forums where people can constructively discuss what should be done, and a social order where responsible decisions can be implemented.

The fourth point commits us to carefully researching, understanding, and collaboratively deliberating over these potential risks and benefits. The MTA itself aspires to be one of the forums the Declaration calls for: a community where religious and secular people can constructively discuss what should be done with humanity’s growing powers.

Point 5

Reduction of existential risks, and development of means for the preservation of life and health, the alleviation of grave suffering, and the improvement of human foresight and wisdom should be pursued as urgent priorities, and heavily funded.

The fifth point prioritizes the mitigation of existential risks and the need to improve human foresight and wisdom. For Mormon Transhumanists, this is a matter of stewardship. The preservation of life and health, and the relief of grave suffering, are continuous with the work of Christ, and the prevention of catastrophic loss is among the most consequential forms that compassion can take.

Point 6

Policy making ought to be guided by responsible and inclusive moral vision, taking seriously both opportunities and risks, respecting autonomy and individual rights, and showing solidarity with and concern for the interests and dignity of all people around the globe. We must also consider our moral responsibilities towards generations that will exist in the future.

The sixth point emphasizes policy-making approaches that embrace human autonomy and human diversity, with concern for the dignity of all people, including future generations. This parallels the Affirmation’s insistence that exaltation be pursued “according to their wills, desires, and laws, to the extent they are not oppressive.” Both documents reject coercive utopianism.

Point 7

We advocate the well-being of all sentience, including humans, non-human animals, and any future artificial intellects, modified life forms, or other intelligences to which technological and scientific advance may give rise.

The seventh point commits us to the well-being of all sentient beings everywhere, including non-human intelligence. Mormon theology is notably hospitable to this breadth of moral concern: Joseph Smith taught that all things, animals included, possess spirits, and Mormon scripture envisions the renewal and sanctification of the whole creation, not merely of human beings.

Point 8

We favour allowing individuals wide personal choice over how they enable their lives. This includes use of techniques that may be developed to assist memory, concentration, and mental energy; life extension therapies; reproductive choice technologies; cryonics procedures; and many other possible human modification and enhancement technologies.

The eighth point underscores the importance of personal choice and individual freedom in efforts to broaden human potential and minimize suffering. As with the Declaration’s sixth point, this commitment to choice maps onto the centrality of agency in Mormon thought. Members of the MTA hold a range of views about any particular enhancement technology; what unites us is the conviction that such choices belong to individuals, exercised within laws that are not oppressive.

Secular and Religious Transhumanism Together

The broader transhumanist movement includes both secular and religious expressions, and the relationship between them has not always been simple. But the history of the MTA within the movement demonstrates that the Declaration’s aspirations do not belong to either camp exclusively. Mormon Transhumanists were among the earliest organized religious participants in the modern transhumanist movement, and we continue to affirm: we are Transhumanists. Together, the Declaration and the Affirmation are the Association’s only official positions, and they fit naturally together: both describe their commitments by what we seek and how we act, rather than by who counts as an insider.

We invite you to read the full text of the Transhumanist Declaration and the Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation.

Questions for Discussion

• The Transhumanist Declaration was drafted by a largely secular community, yet the MTA affirms it as an official position. What in the Declaration resonates with Mormon teachings, and what requires interpretation?
• Point 3 insists that “although all progress is change, not all change is progress.” How do we distinguish between the two?
• What are “existential risks,” and why does the Declaration treat their reduction as an urgent priority? How does this priority relate to religious notions of stewardship?
• Point 7 extends moral concern to non-human animals and future artificial intellects. How far should our circle of moral concern extend, and why?
• Points 6 and 8 emphasize autonomy and personal choice. How do these commitments compare with the Affirmation’s qualifier that exaltation be pursued “according to their wills, desires, and laws, to the extent they are not oppressive”?
• Which points of the Declaration do you find easiest to support? Which do you find most challenging?

Advance to Primer 4